The Letter
This week, the Zuck admitted to receiving pressure from the White House to censor certain COVID-19 content, and from the FBI on demoting the Hunter Biden laptop story. In a letter to the House Judiciary Committee, he wrote:
“I believe the government pressure was wrong, and I regret that we were not more outspoken about it. I also think we made some choices that, with the benefit of hindsight and new information, we wouldn’t make today. Like I said to our teams at the time, I feel strongly that we should not compromise our content standards due to pressure from any Administration in either direction — and we’re ready to push back if something like this happens again.” - Mark Zuckerberg
The Whitehouse response:
“Our position has been clear and consistent: we believe tech companies and other private actors should take into account the effects their actions have on the American people, while making independent choices about the information they present,” according to the spokesperson. — CNN
Zuck is a businessman, and this letter is an attempt to lower the assault on his business. Which means he thinks the Democrats will lose the election because he’s throwing the Biden administration under the bus as an offering to the Republicans. He’s also thinking that if the Democrats do win, the Harris administration won’t come for him. So the letter is a hedge, but it does show how tight this election is. It also reveals an issue I’ve seen with the Democrats over the past couple of years.
Trust Issues
This is how I imagine they were thinking about this.
In the case of COVID: We have a national emergency, we’re unsure of the information, and we need people to comply to keep them safe. There are lies being spread on social media that could be putting others in danger due to the risk of the disease spreading. Let’s ask the heads of the platforms to be vigilant of this.
In the case of the Hunter Biden laptop: We have an upcoming election and this story could cost us the win. Let’s have the FBI go after social media sites to keep the story from spreading.
While I can understand the COVID logic, the laptop logic is an abuse of power. If the story is all lies, go after the New York Post; sue for defamation. Hold a press conference and have Biden speak on the subject. Give the people the information and let them decide. They just assume voters will see that and vote against him. And that’s what defines the current state of politics, they don’t trust the people.
No one likes being told what to do, and when a bully comes knocking at your door, they’re gonna be met with resistance. It’s human nature. Both parties are guilty of this. The Democrats are to blame in this case because it was their administration running the show. Instead of being honest with the public, they decided to not just go after the lies, but any piece of information that went against their messaging using all sorts of labels like disinformation, misinformation, and malinformation. They threatened Facebook by dangling their Section 230 restriction, the safety net that allows social media sites to not be liable for the content posted since they’re not a publication. I do agree that the sites use of promotional algorithms to boost bad content is problematic, and should be given a proper review; but this idea of the government pressuring businesses that don’t play ball is just silly.
We saw this in Florida. DeSantis got a leg up with the way he handled COVID. He took a risk, opened up the state, and left it up to the people to take precautions as they saw fit. Did he get lucky? Yeah, but at least he provided the option. What got him was when he went after Disney, a blatant abuse of power that ultimately led to his downfall.
Change of Heart
I also want to touch on media strategy. Both campaigns have been trying to reach younger voters through influencers and podcasts:
Some 200 content creators were given the special passes to the convention — a credential akin to those given to members of the news media but with additional benefits. (By contrast, the party credentialed some 15,000 journalists, who pay for their workspace and accommodations.) Progressive nonprofits and other outside groups picked up the travel tab for many of the influencers, while underwriting an itinerary of daytime panels and nighttime soirees, as well as an abundance of swag.
Republicans are also using influencers to make inroads among the highly online. At their party’s national convention last month, more than 70 influencers were credentialed, and former President Donald J. Trump has sat for interviews with a number of social media stars. — Free Booze, a Lake Cruise and Selfies Galore: How Democrats Courted Influencers at the D.N.C., NYT
What’s interesting is on the Democrat side, it’s mostly Walz that’s been doing the media coverage while Harris rides the ‘brat’ wave. Their strategy is to ride the trends, which works for increasing reach, but I wonder if it’s enough. Trump on the other hand “has toured the podcast circuit in recent months, recording lengthy interviews with male influencers from comedian Theo Von to wrestler Logan Paul to streamer Adin Ross. He even did a two-hour podcast-style interview with X owner Elon Musk.”
This brings me back to my point on simply laying it all out there. These lengthy interviews give voters a chance to hear him out; I’m surprised Harris hasn’t taken up the same strategy. We probably won’t hear from her until the debate, which I think will be quite the turning point. I know the stats say that debates don’t really move the needle, but we’ve only had maybe 3-4 elections with social media, and the last debate literally got Biden kicked from the race. Although we won’t know the effect of these appearances until the election, I wouldn’t be surprised if this strategy ultimately leads to another 2016 surprise.
Thank you
I love studying brand strategy and political campaigns are no different. It’s fascinating to see how each campaign tackles the media. It’s become quite clear that Trumps strategy is to do it all himself, and Harris’s strategy is to rely on the party, having Walz tackle media appearances and Pete Buttigieg tackle more combative appearances like Fox News. I’m eager to see what strategy ends up winning. As always, if you have any questions, want more explanations, or strongly disagree, comment below, follow me on Twitter (X), follow me on Instagram, or shoot me an email.
Disclaimer: These views are my own, and do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization with which I am affiliated with. This article is written with AI assistance.
Facebook suppressed Covid and Hunter's laptop news on purpose. They knew the election was on the line and they hated Donald Trump. Don't forget all the money they contributed to the Biden's campaign and to register Democrats in masses prior to the election. Also, their push for people to vote by mail. All probably legal (it's a private company excuse) but very unethical for a mass media site.
Now he is trying to cover his behind with the Republicans, but still he is blocking the Trump's bloody picture (after the assassination's attempt) from being shared in his site. He already showed his colors, save the "mea culpa" for another time.
There was a time when journalism was a college carrier, very prestigious and very demanding. Sadly, journalism is dead and now the influencers have risen to the occasion. Who are they, who knows, journalists when to school, these people go shopping, go figure.